Follow this link to my BLOCKBUSTER STORY of how Brett Kimberlin, a convicted terrorist and perjurer, attempted to frame me for a crime, and then got me arrested for blogging when I exposed that misconduct to the world. That sounds like an incredible claim, but I provide primary documents and video evidence proving that he did this. And if you are moved by this story to provide a little help to myself and other victims of Mr. Kimberlin’s intimidation, such as Robert Stacy McCain, you can donate at the PayPal buttons on the right. And I thank everyone who has done so, and will do so.

Wednesday, December 18, 2013

This is the latest post in what I half-jokingly call The Kimberlin Saga®. If you are new to the story, that’s okay! Not
everyone reads my blog. The short
version is that Kimberlin has been harassing me for over a year, his worst
conduct being when he attempted to frame me for a crime. I recognize that this might sound like an
incredible claim, but I provide video and documentary evidence of that fact; in
other words, you don’t have to believe my word.
You only have to believe your eyes.
So, if you are new to the story, go to this page and you’ll be able to catch up on what has been happening.

Update: Now I have posted all the documents I intend to post in the
short term, let me update all of these posts with where you can find each. This is a generic update, so some of these
links will be to this post. My basic
motion to dismiss is here,
but it’s barely worth reading—it literally just says that the case should be
dismissed for all the reasons stated in my memorandum of points of authorities. So that memorandum is the meat, and that is here. Next I have a motion to require verification,
here,
and finally I have a memorandum
aimed at convincing a judge to let whoever Kimberlin Unmasked is preserve his/her/their
anonymity. And finally we see DB
Capital Stategies’ motion to dismiss.
And that is it, for now.

Prepare to be astounded,
folks. Below the fold, exclusive to this
blog is my motion to dismiss Brett Kimberlin’s RICO suit. So go ahead, look:

So yeah, that is another of those
patented Aaron “Worthing” Walker head fakes, leading you to think that you were
about to see all the reasoning, etc. when it is really just a pro-forma “please
dismiss the case for all the reasons I set out in a completely different
document.” In this case it is a
memorandum of points and authorities, which is pretty common in this context.

So you know the good stuff is
coming. When? Bluntly, starting tomorrow. Probably in the afternoon I figure Kimberlin
will have been served these papers by then (meaning I mailed it there and it
should arrive about then). Just to give
you a preview I have sent him four documents and they are all pretty huge, with
the exception of tonight’s.

First, is this motion to dismiss,
which is a small thing. Nothing actually
to get excited about. And not giving
anything to the Maryland Midget early. John Hoge had his own version of it, which is more substantive than this but less substantive than memorandum of points of authorities, here.

Second, will be the memorandum of
points and authorities in support of that motion to dismiss.

Third, we have, “Defendant Walker’s
Motion to Require the Plaintiff to File Verified Papers in Future Filings.” For non-lawyer types, a verified filing means
that you swear it is true, under penalty of perjury. John has a version of that, too.

Fourth, we have, in the state
case, “Defendant Walker’s Memorandum in Support of Defendant Kimberlin
Unmasked’s Motion to Quash.” I will
admit here that that title is kind of misplaced. To recap, Kimberlin filed a subpoena against
Google in the state case aimed at unmasking whoever Kimberlin Unmasked is. That subpoena was granted, but I guess it
didn’t get him what he wanted and so he sought more information. So I thought he did what he had to do and filed
for a new subpoena, in part because someone told me it was a subpoena. I was wrong.
He just filed a motion to compel which is out of order. In any case while misunderstanding the
posture of the situation—because I didn’t realize how badly Kimberlin screwed up—the
title of it is wrong. But as for the
law, well... you judge for yourself.

One reasonable question is: can
you do that? After all, I don’t
represent Kimberlin Unmasked in court.
Well, the answer is that as a party I am allowed to give my opinion on
the law on any issue. I can’t move that
the court do this or that, but I can say, “I agree with X on Y issue, and here
is why.” The way I saw it was I was
going to come in the way the ACLU might come into a case like this: a person
with no dog in the fight, just giving their view of things. We’ll see what happens.

Oh, and he is really going to
hate what I filed. You know, because he
hates the truth and he hates it when a person eloquently states it.

I also know that Dan Backer has
filed a motion to dismiss in the RICO case as well. Before long I expect that to pop up on the web. And I expect many, many more to be filed, and
soon. If they waive service of process
and they received the case at the same time I had, then they will have until
exactly tomorrow to respond. But whether
they waive service of process is an open question. I chose not to, but that isn’t to be taken as
criticism of any other party’s approach.

I will add that memorandum for
the motion to dismiss is barely below 50 pages as required by local rules
(counting the cover page), because it is jam-packed with Brett Kimberlin’s fail. Given that he has done RICO suits before,
there is no excuse for the sheer craptitude of Kimberlin’s presentation. This is why I couldn’t believe that the “Roger
S.” writing at Breitbart.com was a real lawyer, because any real lawyer would
recognize that it is a complete piece of crap, without bothering to research
the law. But I couldn’t say that until
now, because I didn’t want to explain how I knew it was complete crap. You will see the answer to that question
shortly.

She probably even believes her
father when he says that I commented on the article about her successful
YouTube video. Little does she know that
Dan Collins aka @vermontaigne,
has publicly stated he is the author.

For me, one of the great
underappreciated clauses of our Constitution is in the Treason clause. It says: “but no Attainder of Treason shall
work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person
attainted.” The second part of that is
fairly easy to understand, but what about the first. What the hell do they mean by the corruption
of the blood?

Well, the answer is they are
saying you cannot punish the family of a traitor as though they were traitors,
too. It is a talisman of what makes this
country great. Fundamentally we don’t
care who your ancestors were. They could
have been kings, they could have been beggars.
They could have been heroes and they could have been terrorists. We don’t care. Because you are judged as you.

So not knowing this girl, she
enjoys the presumption of innocence that belongs to all strangers. Given the way Brett Kimberlin lies about
everything, I have no reason to think he is telling her the truth about what is
going on and therefore I have no reason to think she approves of what is
actually happening here. If she knew the
truth she would know that her father has been working for years to suppress the
truth about his illegal and immoral conduct, and his criminal and immoral
conduct, combined with his attempt to silence his critics, has brought all this
attention on this family.

But allegedly a few people have
harassed her online, on her facebook and the like. There is always concern, of course, that Brett
or his allies might
be faking a lot of that behavior. But
regardless, if any person draws any negative conclusion about her based on her
father, they are not being charitable enough.
They are forgetting that even when we are talking about Benedict Arnold,
we do not hold the child responsible for the conduct of the father.

Anyway, I wish there was some way
to bring Kimberlin to justice without his elder daughter or any of his family being
dragged into this. But Brett has made
that impossible. Still, I can limit the
damage as much as possible, hence why I will be keeping her name off my blog as
well as her younger sister.. Other
people feel like what Brett has done makes her name newsworthy, and I will
respect that view, but I will not follow their approach.

Finally, I won’t be presenting a
lot of commentary on any of my documents because they pretty much speak for
themselves. I might add in some
commentary on other people’s motions, depending on if the mood strikes me and
if it seems strategically reasonable.
And when I am done, I might even continue to catalogue the outright lies
Brett has put into this document...

...although come to think of it,
some of them will be documented even sooner than that.

And go ahead, pull up a bowl of
popcorn (let the Maryland Midget whine about me saying that, again). Brett Kimberlin is going to learn he has drawn
even more of the wrong kind of attention to himself. Expect me to start releasing documents
tomorrow.

Oh, and keep one more thing in mind
as you read these documents: Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. It says:

(b) Representations
to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other
paper—whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it—an
attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person's
knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under
the circumstances:

(1) it is not being
presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay,
or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;

(2) the claims,
defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a
nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or
for establishing new law;

(3) the factual
contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will
likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further
investigation or discovery; and

(4) the denials of
factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so
identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.

Do you think Brett has obeyed
this rule? Well, we’ll see as we go
forward.

---------------------------------------

My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the
harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get
us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten
years. I know that claim sounds fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these claims
using documentary and video evidence. If you would like to help in the
fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable, please hit the donation link on the
right. And thank you.

Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for snark and site updates. And
you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon
Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent Historyhere. And you can read a little more about
my novel, here.

---------------------------------------

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people,
particularly Brett Kimberlin, of
reprehensible conduct. In some cases, the conduct is even
criminal. In all cases, the only justice I want is through the
appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system. I do not want to see vigilante violence
against any person or any threat of such violence. This kind of conduct is not only morally
wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett
Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him. Do not call him. Do not write him a letter. Do not write him an email. Do not text-message him. Do not engage in any kind of directed
communication. I say this in part
because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want
that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on
his property. Don’t sneak around and try
to photograph him. Frankly try not to
even be within his field of vision. Your
behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to
mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his
organizations, either. And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is
that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with
contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might
report. And even then if he tells you to
stop contacting him, obey that request. That
this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that
a person asks you to stop and you refuse.

And let me say something
else. In my heart of hearts, I don’t
believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above. But if any of you have, stop it, and if you
haven’t don’t start.

About Me

Just a regular, sort of cranky moderately conservative lawyer, living in the greater Washington, D.C. and ruminating on law, life and the local spectator sport known as politics.
Btw, if you want to email me, write to edmd5.20.10 [at] gmail.com. I assume by now you understand that you are supposed to use one of those @ symbols for "[at]."